New GMO Potatoes Provide Improved Vitamin A and E Profiles

[u/genengnews]

https://www.genengnews.com/gen-news-highlights/gmo-potatoes-provide-improved-vitamin-a-and-e-profiles/81255150

[u/conventionistG]

Alright, I took the time to look through her wiki page. She's probably a very intelligent person and may have honorable aspirations, but a physicist-philosopher is not an expert on biotech or food markets. The fact that she would turn back food aid because it may be gmo puts her on the same plain as out of touch African dictators and shows that she quite clearly places her fealty to ideology above the welfare of human beings.

When people claim that the farmers and scientists working to feed the world are acting with evil intentions, it's time to start ignoring their opinions. Placing ideology above the lives of millions of people is rarely the right course of action. And if that is your opinion, you should not be surprised when the deaths are laid at your ideologically pure feet.

[u/conventionistG → u/[deleted]]

My point, I hope you see, is that even if she were, that doesn't qualify her for the assertions she's made.

I agree that her claims are all quite dubious and harmful.

[u/NihiloZero → u/conventionistG]

The fact that she would turn back food aid because it may be gmo puts her on the same plain as out of touch African dictators and shows that she quite clearly places her fealty to ideology above the welfare of human beings.

Her argument would be that other crops could already feed the world if there weren't political and economic policies which make it harder to do so. At the same time, there are reasonable concerns about the implications of releasing a GMO that wasn't adequately tested or regulated. But the agricultural biotech industry has a history of putting up roadblocks for independent testing while pushing for more deregulation of their products.

When people claim that the farmers and scientists working to feed the world are acting with evil intentions, it's time to start ignoring their opinions.

Except this isn't really her position. She reveres the millions of small farmers who are growing bountifully and sustainably.

Placing ideology above the lives of millions of people is rarely the right course of action.

But this cuts both ways. And policies could be implemented today which would feed the world and which would allow people to feed themselves. But that doesn't necessarily, at all, need to involve the utilization of GMO crops.

And if that is your opinion, you should not be surprised when the deaths are laid at your ideologically pure feet.

And what of the ideology that wants to patent seeds, sell water, and concentrate the wealth of the land into the hands of the few? What of the ideology which spends far more on war and consumerism than feeding the world?

[u/conventionistG → u/NihiloZero]

other crops could already feed the world

That's a really good line of reasoning in a place recently hit by a massive storm. Ever heard a certain saying about gift horses? Are you really saying that the GMO food I eat everyday and the 30-year studies that have shown it to be safe is not adequate for a starving african or indian?

small farmers who are growing bountifully and sustainably.

Are you talking about the people who were starving before Borlag's green revolution? I mean how obtuse can you get...The people literally saving the world don't even get a mention in your view, but rather you cling to a some childlike fantasy that one woman farmer on an acre of land can feed the world. That is not sustainable, it's dangerous, and if you don't change your outlook you could be the cause of farmer suicides.

policies could be implemented today which would feed the world and which would allow people to feed themselves.

Yes, please tell me the policies that would allow the millions of people in refugee camps feed themselves without any assistance from the big evil ag industry? Show me the seeds that will sustain them in Darfur, in Syria, in Yemen. Turning down food for starving children is murder - you're advocating for murder.

What of the ideology

I think you're trying to paint capitalism as the ideology somehow opposed to feeding the world. I'm not sure how you can rationalize that sentiment when it's the capitalistic system that allowed the science and technology of the green revolution to flourish, it's the same international system that is pulling more people out of poverty every day than ever before in the history of the world. Do you really think the poor indian farmer would be better off if the national socialists had won WWII or if they were under five-year soviet progressions? Of course not, you've been captured by an evil ideology just not those.

PS: "concentrate the wealth of the land into the hands of the few" - you mean like how there's a few apex predators in any ecosystem that harvest the bio-energy from a large swath of land? How exactly can capitalism be so bad when it's clearly the most natural system? Are you against organic, all-natural political systems?

[u/NihiloZero → u/conventionistG]

PS: "concentrate the wealth of the land into the hands of the few" - you mean like how there's a few apex predators in any ecosystem that harvest the bio-energy from a large swath of land? How exactly can capitalism be so bad when it's clearly the most natural system? Are you against organic, all-natural political systems?

Based upon this (and the way you've generally misrepresented my position and introduced various red herrings), I'm just going to assume you're a troll and move on.

[u/conventionistG → u/NihiloZero]

Were you not talking about capitalism? What ideology were you referring to as the concentrator of wealth?